IRS Claims Authority to Interpret the Law?

-Tax laws enacted by Congress

-Treasury regulations, and

-Court decisions

However, the information given does not cover every situation and is not intended to replace the law or change its meaning.

{snip}

So Why Would You Want To Read It? So You'll Intentionally Mislead Yourself? O.K.

This publication covers some subjects on which a court may have made a decision more favorable to taxpayers than the interpretation by the IRS. Until these differing interpretations are resolved by higher court decisions or in some other way, this publication will continue to present the interpretation by the IRS.

All taxpayers have important rights when working with the IRS. These rights are described in Your Rights as a Taxpayer in the back of this publication.

The IRS Mission.

Provide America's taxpayers top quality service by helping them understand and meet their tax responsibilities and by applying the tax law with integrity and fairness to all." yuck...yuck...yuck...

********************************************************************************************************

Anyone who has ever presented questions about the income tax to the IRS (or to any branch or agency of government) knows what it is like to have the questions dismissed by reference to court decisions or "case law".

No matter how ambiguous or unclear the law, and no matter how logical and reasonable the question, the IRS or other government entities typically dismiss your inquiry with "The courts have ruled … blah, blah, blah." Never mind that some other court may have ruled something completely different on the exact same issue on a different date in a different part of the country; "they" are relying on this particular ruling, and, if you don't like it, you can appeal to … the courts! Or more precisely, THEIR court - Tax Court!

Any analysis of the foregoing language in Publication 17 must include a consideration of Department of Treasury/ Internal Revenue Service Privacy Act of 1974 Resource Material Document #6372 [See "ICE" Web site page iresist - scroll down to item #21].

This document plainly states that the Criminal Investigation Division of the IRS maintains files on all Federal District Court judges. To my knowledge neither the IRS nor any other government entity has ever disputed the existence or contents of this document. The very judges who decide the most serious and pivotal tax cases in America are kept under surveillance by the IRS. No one utters a peep about this?

There is something very wrong with this picture. Let us ask some questions about the language on Page 2 of Publication 17.

First, we read "The explanations and examples … reflect the interpretation by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) of … tax laws enacted by Congress, … Treasury regulations, and … Court decisions." According to Webster's New World Dictionary, to "interpret" is to "explain the meaning of; make understandable; to translate…"

Are the tax laws written by Congress so unclear that their meaning must be "explained"? Is Congress writing tax law that cannot be understood? Why would tax law written by Congress need to be "translated"? Is Congress writing tax law in languages unknown to most Americans, such as Greek, Arabic, Chinese or Swahili?

If the Congress is writing tax law that cannot be understood and must be explained, or even translated, then who should be entrusted with the responsibility of doing this explaining or translating?

Over many years Americans have been conditioned to accept the idea that law is just so complicated that it cannot be written clearly in a way that "common folks" can understand. Thus, Americans have grown to accept the idea that the courts "interpret the law". Not surprisingly, the legal profession vigorously defends this arrangement not only as a "legal principle" but virtually an "Article of Faith". When judges' interpretations interfere with the desires of legislators, there are cries of "Judicial Activism"; however, for the most part politicians are quite satisfied with an arrangement that allows them to write ambiguous law and then shift the blame to the courts when there is a fuss about it. The entire arrangement is a ludicrous, self-serving occasion for corruption and a perfect seedbed for tyranny. The issue is not that complicated. It is simply preposterous and unacceptable that "lawmakers" should be allowed to write laws that cannot be plainly understood by the people to whom the laws are to apply. This situation offends both common sense and common decency. That the American people tolerate this role of the courts, to me, is a shameful tragedy. How do people expect to remain free from tyranny when they: 1) allow their elected representatives to write laws that cannot be understood and 2) tolerate having those laws "interpreted" by judges who are largely unelected, unaccountable and have a monstrous conflict of interest?

Naturally there are problems with the justice system and the legal profession. Anywhere you find human beings you will find some degree of corruption. The extent of general corruption is difficult to know for sure. However, it is instructive that "attorney" is at the very bottom of the list of professionals Americans feel they can trust. Judges probably rank a good bit higher; but one must remember that virtually all judges started out as attorneys. Does the apple fall far from the tree? Further, I do not believe it is possible for most people to admit to themselves that they do not trust judges or the courts; the implications of such a distrust are simply too unsettling due, in fact, to the very issues we are considering in this writing. "Cognitive dissonance" rears its ugly head.

In spite of whatever systemic corruption exists in the legal system, there is an important distinction to be made when the government has a vested interest in the outcome of a case! Few Americans, having any experience in law or politics, are naïve enough to believe that judges are not political creatures. When Party A sues Party B, or when a District Attorney is prosecuting someone accused of robbery or murder, the legal system works fairly honestly and effectively a good deal of the time; which is to say, the level of corruption probably does not get in the way of justice most of the time. However, when the government (or, perhaps more appropriately, the Establishment) has a vested interest in the outcome of a case, you can forget about the law or "justice"; the entire proceeding will be corrupted and fixed from start to finish. Thanks to what is left of the jury system such cases may not always turn out the way the judges know they are "supposed to", but you can be sure the judges are pulling every trick in the book to engineer the outcome their political cronies expect. There are no better examples of this than income tax cases.

Virtually everyone who has been involved with the income tax for any length of time has his or her pet story of outright judicial tyranny in a tax case. True, there are cases where defendants legal mistakes and erroneous arguments have facilitated the corrupt outcome; but that does not excuse the corrupt intent of judges who set out to pervert the law.

Please ponder these realities for a moment. Millions of Americans have had all manner of private property (including their homes) seized by the IRS. American families have had their homes broken up by bankruptcy, divorce, and suicide. All of this is happening not as a result of any clear law written by our elected representatives, but only as a result of some judge's opinion of what the law means. To make the matter even more repugnant, it is widely known and easily demonstrated that judges' opinions vary from state to state and change from decade to decade. So much for "due process" and "equality under the law"! Tolerating this situation constitutes a mindless, spineless betrayal of every principle held dear by that unique group of colonists and immigrants who fought so hard and sacrificed so much to build a new nation and to be free from tyranny.

As if the situation with the courts is not bad enough, here in IRS Publication 17 we have the IRS assuming and announcing that it has the power to "interpret" the tax laws written by Congress! What is the IRS? Is anyone at the Internal Revenue Service elected by the American people? What exactly is the IRS? The agency does not appear anywhere in the United States law (Title 31 United States Code) controlling the U.S. Dept. of the Treasury -- under which your Congressmen will tell you the IRS operates. Extensive research back as far as the Civil War can find no evidence that the IRS was ever even created as an agency of the United States government. Scroll down to item #24 on the ICE Web site at click here. This is horrendous, and it gets even more absurd.

Not only do these unelected people at the IRS claim the authority to "interpret" tax laws enacted by Congress, they also claim the authority to interpret "Treasury regulations". What are "Treasury regulations"? Well, first, what is "Treasury"? We are led to believe, and I'm sure your Congressman and nearly every attorney in America will tell you that "Treasury" refers to the "United States Department of the Treasury" currently headed by Secretary Paul O'Neill. There is voluminous research to indicate that this is not the case; but let us simply ask why IRS letters and publication say merely "Treasury" or "Department of the Treasury", but never "United States Department of the Treasury". Why? So what are regulations? Regulations are "promulgated" (caused to be written and then officially issued) by the Secretary of whatever department of the Executive Branch is responsible for enforcement of particular laws enacted by Congress. For example, the Department of the Treasury is ostensibly charged with enforcing the "Internal Revenue Laws". Regulations under Titles 26 and 27 are for the direction of government employees having responsibilities under the taxing statutes and for the benefit of Americans having liabilities under those same statutes. Regulations provide the specific administrative details needed to carry out only the expressed intent of the taxing statutes enacted by Congress. There is some debate over the applicability of the "income tax" to the average American; however, in any case Treasury regulations cannot expand a taxing statute, which is to say they cannot create a liability that is not clearly expressed in the taxing statute enacted by Congress. Similarly, Treasury Regulations cannot grant authority to government officials outside of the scope of the underlying taxing statute.

If the IRS Commissioner works directly for the Secretary of the United States Department of the Treasury, does it make sense that the Secretary would give the Commissioner directions (i.e., Treasury regulations) that cannot be understood? If the Secretary has a responsibility to provide regulatory direction to Americans having liabilities under the taxing statutes, why would he write something incomprehensible and then authorize the Commissioner of the IRS to "interpret" it for the American people?

Why should the IRS ever need to "interpret" Treasury regulations? If the IRS finds it necessary to "interpret" these regulations, in whose favor do you suppose it will interpret them -- in favor of the "taxpayer" or in favor of the IRS? Do you like the smell of fish?

Finally, and most bizarre of all, the IRS claims the authority to "interpret" court decisions. Talk about Catch-22! We have already considered at length the absurdity of allowing Congress to write law that is so unclear that unelected, unaccountable judges are left to decide what the law means by their "interpretations". Now the IRS comes along in Publication 17 and says it is perfectly free to interpret the interpretations! Are you beginning to see how tax law works? What we have here is a perfect party game for the sociopath -- one in which the "Emperor for a Day" gets to decide how to divide up 50% of the fruits of the labor of the American people… or who loses their home… or who goes to jail. Congressmen, senators, the Treasury Secretary, judges, the IRS Commissioner and all their attorney buddies sit around in a circle and whisper tax law in the ear of the person to their left. If you want to know what the tax law is at any point in time, ask whomever you wish. If you don't like what they say, what another round and the answer will be different. In any case, if you want to know what is going to happen to you, you'd better ask the IRS Commissioner for his latest interpretation because that is the reality with which you must deal -- not the written law, or even court decisions. I mean, if this is going to continue, the IRS Commissioner's yearly salary should be boosted to $10 million, and we need a Constitutional amendment to fill the office by a yearly national election!

After announcing its intent to "interpret the interpretations", the IRS then makes the following astounding assertion:

"However, the information given does not cover every situation and is not intended to replace the law or change its meaning."

This is a bit like receiving a "Thank you" note from a burglar.

Change what meaning? If there were a meaning, there would be no need for an interpretation, right? "Not intended to replace the law"? What are they talking about? That is precisely what the IRS is doing! It would be more accurate to say the IRS is not only replacing the law, it is simply creating it! After all, as a matter of both common sense and legal principle (the "Void for Vagueness" maxim of law), a law that cannot be understood simply does not exist. Ultimately, the message from the IRS in Publication 17 is this: "We will determine what the tax law is in the United States of America, and we will apply that law to you in a way that is most favorable to us." This is confirmed by the next paragraph from Publication 17, and it reads as follows: When "… a court may have made a decision…" (an interpretation) that differs from that of the IRS, the IRS declares itself free to ignore the court's ruling and proceed with its own interpretation "… until these differing interpretations are resolved by higher court decisions or in some other way." What is meant by "resolved"? Notice that the IRS does not say it will abide by higher court decisions; and no mention is made of the Supreme Court or any decisions it may make. The Supreme Court is, after all, just another court that "may have made a decision more favorable to taxpayers than the interpretation by the IRS." There is plenty of evidence to suggest that the IRS routinely interprets the interpretations of the Supreme Court. No doubt the IRS interpretation of "resolved by higher court decisions" only contemplates a higher court overturning a lower court decision so that it agrees with the IRS interpretation of the law.

In the paragraph we have just been considering, the IRS mentions differing interpretations being resolved by higher court decisions or "… in some other way". What do you suppose is meant by "in some other way"? Civil war? Common on, now! The "other way" these differing interpretations are resolved is simple: the government just looks the other way! I am reminded of the old saying about what a 900-pound gorilla does when you let him out of his cage, namely "anything he wants". Government spokesmen love to use the term "domestic terrorism" every chance they get. Yet no public figure with any significant Media exposure has had the courage to apply the term "domestic terrorist" to the IRS. Why? Obviously, because they themselves are terrified of the IRS., item #21, and recall that most of the judges deciding critical tax cases are themselves under investigation by the Criminal Investigation Division of the IRS. Talk about "contempt of court"! Indeed, if and when the American people ever figure out what has been going on here, they will hold the courts in complete contempt!

It is bad enough that not one United States President, one Congressman, one Senator, one Federal judge, nor one public figure of any stature whatsoever has ever had the courage to confront these issues and level with the American people. Far worse is the likelihood that these people do not even want to know the truth. Amidst a crescendo of protest and horror stories they persist in denial and refuse to even listen. This is because they are all, each and every one of them, terrified of what the IRS can and might well do to them or their families, should they speak out in opposition. Those who will plead ignorance (theirs or mine) can ponder my remaining observations and offer any excuses or rebuttals they would care to make. Every family has some little piece of "dirty laundry", you know -- the kind rarely talked about and then only in hushed tones. For the American Family this little piece of dirty laundry has burgeoned into a giant, stinking clothes-hamper inside of which is found a badly mildewed reality.

The serfs in the Middle Ages surrendered a mere 20 to 30% of the fruits of their labors to the "Lords" of the land on which they were "allowed" to live. What percentage of the fruits of the labors of the American people is confiscated by the income tax? The "average" American probably pays 25% income tax for starters (give or take). On top of that, there is "Social Security". The true amount here is at least what the so-called "self-employed" pay, and that is 15%. So, we are already at roughly 40%. This includes absolutely nothing for the billions of man-hours collectively expended by Americans to keep track of the information needed to "comply" with the tax laws. This includes nothing for the countless hours spent by Americans (and American businesses that exist solely) to find ways to reduce tax liabilities. This includes nothing whatever for the taxes paid by American business and ultimately paid by their customers -- the American people. To this list we could add a host of excise taxes that are also collected and enforced by the IRS, and paid indirectly by the American people. (Not collected by the IRS are property taxes, sales taxes and the multitude of license and permit fees that are extracted from the American people.) It would appear that easily 50% of the fruits of the labor of the American people are confiscated by the IRS alone. In total the American people are at least twice as enslaved as the serfs in the Middle Ages. (Exactly who is enslaving the American people would probably require a sojourn into the land of "fractional reserve banking" and "debt-based money", an endeavor well beyond the scope of this piece.)

Is a family living the "American Dream" or the American Nightmare when 2 or even 3 "incomes" are needed just to "make ends meet" and the children spend most their time with strangers. Parents are shocked and disappointed when they discover that their children have adopted "strange" values and customs. For many families in the "Land of the Fee and the Home of the Slave" one parent (50%) winds up being a slave to the IRS and the other a slave to the banker who owns the house in which the family lives. A family is "doing well" in America when the 50% the IRS allows it to keep will pay for a nice home and lots of toys. It is a rare American family that enjoys a comfortable standard of living with a full-time parent rearing the children, passing along values and principles their grandparents would recognize. Thus it appears to me that the majority of the American people are in fact 100% enslaved -- 50% by taxation and 50% by lifestyle choices. Seduced and mollified by toys and technology, or exhausted from paying both the taxman and the banker -- either way, few Americans seem to comprehend that the price ("including tax") has been the near destruction of the American family.

There are growing pockets of serious restlessness in America. Yet, aside from that "activism" enjoying momentary "political correctness", any meaningful resistance to the intrusive corruption of the Establishment is ridiculed and demonized by the "popular" Media, the effect being to inoculate the masses against the truth. This is particularly true in the areas of taxation, money and banking. The Media blackballs politicians and pundits who dare to challenge the Establishment line on these topics. They are either ignored or ridiculed, but in no case given a forum in which their ideas can be fully and openly explored.

Politicians are constantly talking out of both sides of their mouths about "what the American people want" and "meeting the needs of the American people", while the Media makes sure the American people have plenty to worry about -- and don't forget to file their tax returns by April 15. For quite a while now this circus has been run mostly by corrupt, dangerous egomaniacs who took over when the American people were hit over the head by "prosperity" and suffered spiritual amnesia. In spite of the valiant efforts of a few Americans, the amnesia persists, and most Americans with an I.Q. above room temperature continue to just ignore the circus, looking in only occasionally to make a cynical remark. Most Americans have little or no academic insight into the issues that fueled the Revolution in 1776. Although today's culture and economics are far removed from 1776, an increasing number of Americans may be gaining an appreciation in their gut for the issues that fueled the American Revolution. It was never about "freedom to…"; it was about "freedom from…" -- freedom from the intrusive meddling of government in every aspect of their lives! To me, most politicians and judges are cowards and gangsters. They are too terrified of the IRS to even comment on the matters we are exploring, yet they gleefully enrich themselves with funds extorted from the American people by the most feared and hated organization in American history.

It is important to note that I have personally met two men and one woman each of whom worked for the IRS for several years. All three are quality human beings whom I respect and like. The two men both have told me that the people they worked with at the IRS were good, decent people who are every bit as deceived about the nature of the income tax as the rest of the public. In my own personal dealings and communications with IRS employees, I have always attempted to be civil and respectful of the people, even if I loathe the entity for which they work. Most IRS employees have behaved in a pleasant professional manner with me; a few have been particularly helpful and friendly, a few have been extremely nervous and openly hostile. I remember one who was obviously carrying a gun and was without a doubt one of the most hateful and murderous looking human beings I have ever been near. To me he epitomized the soul of the organization known as the Internal Revenue Service and its vicious destruction of American lives that I have witnessed over the past decade. Nevertheless, when asked about the IRS, I always tell people to never forget they are dealing with human beings who deserve to be treated as you or I would want to be treated. Even when calling people to account or pursuing legal action nothing is gained by treating people in an ugly or mean-spirited manner. I do have a bit of a problem understanding how so many IRS employees can continue to ignore the serious questions raised by the tens of thousands of Americans who have sent them legitimate questions about their activities. Brainwashing is a difficult obstacle to overcome. One thing is for sure, no one's mind was ever changed by anyone who was mean and nasty to them. Having made the distinction between the IRS and most of the people who happen to work there, I will still boldly state that the entity known as the Internal Revenue Service makes King George look like Santa Claus. The fruits of an artificial entity generally bear the characteristics of its leaders -- those few at the top who establish the goals, tactics and attitudes. This being the case, I can only conclude that the people who truly run the IRS (and this may extend well above the Commissioner himself) have to be among the most evil, heartless, despicable creatures God ever created. Their behavior gives a whole new meaning to the cliché "crimes against humanity". Politicians and judges who build their careers running interference for this evil are not much better than the demons they serve. God help these people if the American people actually wake up before Congress can sweep the whole mess under the rug by abolishing the income tax and disbanding the IRS. Moving along, the next paragraph on this page of Publication 17 reads:

"All taxpayers have important rights when working with the IRS. These rights are described in Your Rights as a Taxpayer in the back of this publication." Where did these "important rights" originate? They are to be found in the tax laws enacted by Congress. With regard to "Tax laws enacted by Congress" the IRS has informed us that Publication 17 reflects the "interpretation of the Internal Revenue Service". It is reassuring to know that IRS Publication 17 reflects the IRS's interpretation of taxpayers' "important rights when working with the IRS". Next thing you know Congress will be allowing Jack the Ripper to interpret women's rights legislation. What a farce!

The final paragraph on Page 2 of Publication reads: "The IRS Mission. Provide America's taxpayers top quality service by helping them understand and meet their tax responsibilities and by applying the tax law with integrity and fairness to all."

Faintly reminiscent of the Pledge of Allegiance ("… with liberty and justice for all."), wouldn't you say? Stirring rhetoric from an organization that not too many months ago seized all of the assets of the Stout's, an 80-year-old couple in Texas, and threw them out of their life-long home "… with integrity and fairness for all." An Afterthought

Peonage. "A condition of servitude (prohibited by 13th Amendment) compelling persons to perform labor in order to payoff a debt." -- Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition

I'm just speculating, but I believe the IRS "interpretation" of the 13th Amendment, as it relates to the IRS "interpretation" of the tax laws enacted by Congress, would find no conflict whatsoever. After all, no one is compelled to incur a tax debt. You can always just sit around and starve to death.

I do believe I've become just a bit cynical.

"The spirit of the times may alter, will alter. Our rulers will become corrupt, our people careless... From the conclusion of this war we shall be going downhill. It will not then be necessary to resort every moment to the people for support.

They will be forgotten, therefore, and their rights disregarded. They will forget themselves, but in the sole faculty of making money, and will never think of uniting to affect a due respect for their rights.

The shackles, therefore...will be made heavier and heavier, till our rights shall revive or expire in a convulsion."